FASM?s macro abilities are better than the ones of NASM!
Still waiting for that to be demonstrated. if you have a pointer to a page that shows some (useful) macro FASM can do and which is impossible for NASM, or some page that shows how easier it is to program macros for FASM compared to NASM macros, you're welcome.
I also belief that FASM generates smaller code than NASM.
NASM was known to be a do exactly what you're told
assembler. So if you want to use a 1-byte constant or a short displacement, you should tell it to the assembler. Otherwise, the assembler just picks what the default stuff means.
mov eax,1 ;; this one will take 5 bytes iirc
mov eax,byte 1;; this one takes only 2 bytes
That may be awkward or save your life depending on the situation, but i admit it is awkward more often than it saves your life.
And if you want to develop for 64bit, FASM is the only way to go, because NASM doesn?t support it and YASM is not that useable - at the time I tested it - !
Now *this* is a real argument.